The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 ( talk) 03:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

HOP Ranch

• ... that potter Artus Van Briggle spent three summers at HOP Ranch to gather strength as he re-created a forgotten Ming Dynasty glaze process that won him international acclaim?

Created by Dnforney ( talk). Self nominated at 04:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC).

• Even before I look at the article, the hook is far too long at 240 characters.-- Laun chba ller 19:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Not only that... the article doesn't say he "rediscovered" a "forgotten process", rather that the subject was on a "quest to identify soils that could be used to re-create a pottery glaze resembling that of Ming Dynasty works". That's quite different. EEng ( talk) 02:04, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Look, I'm not trying to be difficult, but now that I look at the source, it says he "became intrigued with re-creating the lost matte glaze of the Chinese Ming Dynasty." It doesn't say he did it. And to be blunt, I'm not sure we should be adopting phrases like "international acclaim" for attempted recreation of the lost Ming process from New Falcon Herald, the "Local newspaper for Falcon, Calhan, Peyton, Black Forest and Stetson Hills." An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary sources. EEng ( talk) 13:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I have tried to address above comments. In particular I've completely re-worked the Van Briggle information to attribute it to the leading experts/authors books on Van Briggle and make the information far more specific. Hopefully it leaves no doubt that he in fact re-created, revived (or what have you) the old process having a breakthrough in 1901, later winning top awards in international exhibits in 1903, 1904. Thanks! dnforney ( talk) 13:42, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• Hook has apparently been shortened in place (next time please use ALT hooks!) so it isn't above the maximum allowed; full review needed, including of issues already raised. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• I agree that the part about "international acclaim" is superfluous. The first part is enough...
• ALT1: ... that potter Artus Van Briggle spent three summers at HOP Ranch to gather strength as he recreated a forgotten Ming Dynasty glaze process?
• However, the hook fact about recreating the glaze process is not cited in the article, after the sentence in question. Also, the first paragraph under Dangers, and the last paragraph under Ranch culture, need at least one cite, per DYK rules. Yoninah ( talk) 00:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
• ALT2: ... that potter Artus Van Briggle spent three summers at HOP Ranch to gather strength and recreate a lost Ming Dynasty glaze process?

Comment Seems cited to me. I added substantially to the article and the citations. In any event, I would assume that as to the off line entries we would WP:AGF and that would suffice. It does ordinarily in DYK. This is apparently the author's first DYK, so there is no QPQ required. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• ALT3: ... that potter Artus Van Briggle spent three summers at HOP Ranch to gather strength as he recreated a lost Ming Dynasty glaze process?

Comment I greatly appreciate the assists! Is there anything else I might do? Thank you! dnforney ( talk) 19:27, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment I've put into the article the following quotation from page one of the Nelson book: "Artus Van Briggle was truly a master artisan and a giant in American art pottery. While highly talented as a painter, he is best known for his sculpture and designs in clay, which he combined with his rediscovery of a formula for a dead matte glaze which had eluded makers of artistic pottery since the Chinese pottery of the Ming Dynasty." I submit that is the final answer to the query. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 21:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

• We, and the hook, should be talking about the ranch, not the person who spent three summers there... Drmies ( talk) 18:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

• I agree with Drmies. Here are some other ideas:
• ALT4: ... that the owners of the HOP Ranch befriended the local Southern Ute Native Americans by feeding them biscuits and lending them field glasses and rifles for their hunting expeditions? (if you use this hook, it needs a cite right after the sentence in question)
• ALT5: ... that William Holmes, one of the three partners in HOP Ranch, was struck by lightning as he attempted to repair a fence on the property? Yoninah ( talk) 19:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

• ALT6: ... that in 1874, HOP Ranch became one of the first to import Hereford cattle for beef production in the state of Colorado? (I haven't checked this for length)
• ALT7: ... the Holmes brothers of HOP Ranch became one of the first to import Hereford cattle for beef production in the state of Colorado? (also not checked for length)
• ALT8: ... that HOP Ranch was one of the first to import Hereford cattle for beef production in the state of Colorado? (shorter hook yet, but still not checked for length) Dnforney ( talk) 20:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
• ALT9: ... that in 1874, the Holmes brothers of HOP Ranch were among the first to import Hereford cattle for beef production in the state of Colorado? Dnforney ( talk) 21:04, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

• I get it, you want a cattle hook ;). ALT9 looks the best. Hook length is fine. Hook ref for the brothers importing the cattle verified and cited inline; hook ref for the brothers owning the ranch AGF and cited inline. However, there is still the matter of at least one citation needed in the first paragraph under "Dangers". Yoninah ( talk) 23:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

• I actually think ALT4 was pretty good and will re-propose a variation of it as ALT10. Just want to make sure you think the hook is interesting and eye-catching. I have edited the HOP Ranch article accordingly to make the inline citations for that paragraph very specific if you think that hook, now ALT10, is better. Regarding the "Dangers" paragraph; I request a waiver of the rules for the following reason. Please read that section carefully. That first paragraph is an introductory paragraph with very broad and basic information -- every single sentence is later supported extensively by each subsequent paragraph (even in the same order in which the original statements were made in the opening paragraph), throughout the remainder of the section - and each of those paragraphs are well cited. If you don't agree, than I most humbly and respectfully ask for a suggestion. I think it degrades the readability of the article to just delete that opening paragraph. I honestly feel it is a matter of writing style, but I believe everything is written in the required encyclopedic style.

• ALT10: ... that the Holmes family of the HOP Ranch in early Colorado befriended Southern Ute Native Americans, feeding them biscuits and lending them field glasses and rifles for their hunting expeditions? (I think this is ~189 characters, and rather like it as well as ALT9). Dnforney ( talk) 12:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

• Fine, so we have a choice between ALT9 and ALT10. Since I wrote the latter hook, I request another reviewer to sign off on it. Regarding the citation, Rule D2 calls for a minimum of one cite per paragraph. From an encyclopedic point of view, everything you wrote in that paragraph could be construed as point of view and therefore must be sourced. The only place introductions without citations are allowed is the lead, and even there, controversial statements must be sourced. However, this is DYK, which encourages "start-class" articles. Therefore we only require one cite per paragraph. The simplest solution, which I did, is to combine the first and second paragraphs under "Dangers". When and if you expand the article, you can add more cites. Best, Yoninah ( talk) 09:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
• Many thanks to you, Yoninah, and 7&6=thirteen for your assistance in the process. It is much appreciated! Dnforney ( talk) 12:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

• ALT11: ... that the Holmes family of the early Colorado HOP Ranch befriended Southern Ute Native Americans, fed them biscuits and lent them field glasses and rifles for hunting expeditions? 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 13:28, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you User talk:7&6=thirteen, for tightening the hook. @ Dnforney: we've given this nomination enough ink and it's really time to move it to the main page. However, since I originally proposed ALT11, someone else needs to sign off on it. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 16:57, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

• @ Yoninah: I couldn't agree more! Let's go!!  :-) Do we need to do anything in particular to get somebody to sign off? Thanks again! Dnforney ( talk) 00:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

• I think User talk:7&6=thirteen could approve it, because he only added two words. Otherwise we have to wait for another reviewer to stop by. Yoninah ( talk) 02:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

• Came back after there was some questions that arose after an initial review. New enough, more than long enough. QPQ is confirmed. Clearly notable on this article, which has an interesting connection to Detroit and Pewabic Pottery. But I digress. Well referenced and supported by more than ample source. My plagiarism checker is not functioning, so I could not check for copyvio or close paraphrasing. Latest hook and article are neutral, and interesting and referenced. Does not appear that a QPQ is required. Assuming that the interaction with the native Americans is interesting enough, I thought the supply of field glasses and rifles was itself illuminating. I would appreciate it if somebody would check for copy vios, although I thin there are none. But I don't want this to bite me in the ass. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 18:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

• Hi, thanks for the quick response. But are you sure you reviewed HOP Ranch? Your comment about "latrines in the passageways" is referring to the recent hook for Townsend's vole. Yoninah ( talk) 19:00, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Corrections made within my previous comment. Sorry about the misstatement. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 19:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. Reinstating tick for ALT11. Yoninah ( talk) 19:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)